There are two things that are certain in life. You will face struggles and there will be an eventual end to it. In recent years, the issue of physician assisted suicide has been brought into question. Is it right? Is it something better left behind closed doors where the patient is “accidentally” given too much pain medicine? Or should we just go Dutch? With the copious amounts of human rights, opinions and evidence to take into account, it is difficult for me to understand how I feel about the whole issue. But I hope I am capable of expressing myself clearly. Those who argue for the right to die, claim it is a human’s right to their own life. In his suicide note, Chris Hill describes many of the reasons he chose to end his own life “The simplest of everyday tasks—getting up, having a shower, getting dressed—became an enormous hassle and the source of endless frustration”. He had become a paraplegic after as hang gliding accident, and after giving his new “existence” a chance, found the burden and challenge of that life was too much. He claimed to have lost the joys he valued in life. In fact, he believes he would not have chosen to live after his accident having known the difficulties, “My enforced recovery and rehabilitation cost taxpayers at least $150,000 by my rough estimate, money that would not have been wasted had anybody bothered to ask me how I felt about the whole thing”. He poses the argument that he should have been able to chose for himself rather than having the restrictions of laws keep him from choosing to end his life. He recognizes that there are others who should be capable of living with the daily limitations he faced, and acknowledges his choice is not one for anyone. He viewed his choice to life or death as his decision to make, and incapable of pursuing it any other way, committed suicide on his own. In Switzerland, physician assisted suicide is legal. Peter Admiraal is a doctor who is a part of a hospital that practices voluntary euthanasia. He states “I regard it as sometimes morally right, as not only compatible with the properly understood duties and responsibilities of a doctor, but as an act sometime required by them. To fail to practice voluntary euthanasia under some circumstances is to fail the patient”. He claims that eliminating the option of voluntary euthanasia prevents a patient from having their needs listened to. He believes that his ability to euthanize his patients allows him to fully respect patients’ wishes in the ways other doctors are not. Admiraal continues “Very often passive euthanasia is morally worse than active euthanasia…we inflict on the patient a way of dying that he or she does not want, and finds unacceptable and undignified”. He sees this as a failure as a doctor. Doctors are expected to respect a patients’ autonomy, and by forcing and unwanted die, they not only fail their job, but disrespect and abuse the patient. Now those on the opposing side, find value in any and every human life. Many doctors oppose the idea because they find it to be the opposite of their purpose. The Catholic Church, is one of the largest groups opposing the right to die. In their Declaration of euthanasia, suicide is viewed as “a refusal of love for self, the denial of the natural instinct to live, a flight from the duties of justice and charity to one’s neighbor”. Voluntary euthanasia is plain and simply killing “that nothing and no one in any way can permit”. It is seen more as an easy way out rather than an acceptance of the way God has planned you to live. Allison Davis was born with a congenital defect. Despite the encouragement of doctors, her parents fought for her right to live. She now works full time “defending the right to life of handicapped people”. She looks at legislation that works to allow doctors to withhold treatment from newborns with disabilities, and is disappointed by the people who support it. “Who can say I have no worthwhile quality of life?” she continues to argue that in no way can you know for sure what the outcome a of a person’s life will be. She sees voluntary euthanasia as one step closer to active euthanasia being taken out of context, threatening her, and any other person which is handicap. By no means do I enjoy the idea of people killing themselves. I don’t find it right, but it is understandable why people who are terminally ill decide to end their life. I recognize that it is not my place to ban people from killing themselves. It is their decision. I don’t agree with Dr. K that a doctor should be able to inject ANY patient with a lethal amount of drugs. If a person wants to kill themselves, I believe it should be by their own hand, if they are capable of it. Yes, a doctor should be able to provide the means, but in no case the action. A patient should not ask another person to kill them. In the case of a disabled person, there should be a way for them to be able to commit suicide, but I think that like in the case of Dan James, there should be time to learn to live with their disability. It seems to me, he never gave himself a chance to cope. As for Doctor Death himself, I give him credit for his passion to his cause. I think he is a bit too, how to say it, excited about the idea of doctors being able to assist in their patient’s suicides. I don’t think he quite realizes that for the safety of the patient as well as the doctor there should be some major rules set in place first. I don’t agree with assisted suicide, but I don’t think it should be completely illegal. I think a person has a right to their body, and in the case of painful deaths, they should be able to choose. Doctor Death may not have been the right person to voice his opinion for his cause. In fact, I think he might have damaged the reputation of assisted suicide with his abrasiveness. I don’t think we would be on a “slippery slope” if assisted suicide was legalized, because I don’t believe that there is ever a definite “slippery slope”. Assisted suicide is such a complex idea. And I don’t see it being compromised on in any near future.
Those who argue for the right to die, claim it is a human’s right to their own life. In his suicide note, Chris Hill describes many of the reasons he chose to end his own life “The simplest of everyday tasks—getting up, having a shower, getting dressed—became an enormous hassle and the source of endless frustration”. He had become a paraplegic after as hang gliding accident, and after giving his new “existence” a chance, found the burden and challenge of that life was too much. He claimed to have lost the joys he valued in life. In fact, he believes he would not have chosen to live after his accident having known the difficulties, “My enforced recovery and rehabilitation cost taxpayers at least $150,000 by my rough estimate, money that would not have been wasted had anybody bothered to ask me how I felt about the whole thing”. He poses the argument that he should have been able to chose for himself rather than having the restrictions of laws keep him from choosing to end his life. He recognizes that there are others who should be capable of living with the daily limitations he faced, and acknowledges his choice is not one for anyone. He viewed his choice to life or death as his decision to make, and incapable of pursuing it any other way, committed suicide on his own.
In Switzerland, physician assisted suicide is legal. Peter Admiraal is a doctor who is a part of a hospital that practices voluntary euthanasia. He states “I regard it as sometimes morally right, as not only compatible with the properly understood duties and responsibilities of a doctor, but as an act sometime required by them. To fail to practice voluntary euthanasia under some circumstances is to fail the patient”. He claims that eliminating the option of voluntary euthanasia prevents a patient from having their needs listened to. He believes that his ability to euthanize his patients allows him to fully respect patients’ wishes in the ways other doctors are not. Admiraal continues “Very often passive euthanasia is morally worse than active euthanasia…we inflict on the patient a way of dying that he or she does not want, and finds unacceptable and undignified”. He sees this as a failure as a doctor. Doctors are expected to respect a patients’ autonomy, and by forcing and unwanted die, they not only fail their job, but disrespect and abuse the patient.
Now those on the opposing side, find value in any and every human life. Many doctors oppose the idea because they find it to be the opposite of their purpose. The Catholic Church, is one of the largest groups opposing the right to die. In their Declaration of euthanasia, suicide is viewed as “a refusal of love for self, the denial of the natural instinct to live, a flight from the duties of justice and charity to one’s neighbor”. Voluntary euthanasia is plain and simply killing “that nothing and no one in any way can permit”. It is seen more as an easy way out rather than an acceptance of the way God has planned you to live.
Allison Davis was born with a congenital defect. Despite the encouragement of doctors, her parents fought for her right to live. She now works full time “defending the right to life of handicapped people”. She looks at legislation that works to allow doctors to withhold treatment from newborns with disabilities, and is disappointed by the people who support it. “Who can say I have no worthwhile quality of life?” she continues to argue that in no way can you know for sure what the outcome a of a person’s life will be. She sees voluntary euthanasia as one step closer to active euthanasia being taken out of context, threatening her, and any other person which is handicap.
By no means do I enjoy the idea of people killing themselves. I don’t find it right, but it is understandable why people who are terminally ill decide to end their life. I recognize that it is not my place to ban people from killing themselves. It is their decision. I don’t agree with Dr. K that a doctor should be able to inject ANY patient with a lethal amount of drugs. If a person wants to kill themselves, I believe it should be by their own hand, if they are capable of it. Yes, a doctor should be able to provide the means, but in no case the action. A patient should not ask another person to kill them. In the case of a disabled person, there should be a way for them to be able to commit suicide, but I think that like in the case of Dan James, there should be time to learn to live with their disability. It seems to me, he never gave himself a chance to cope.
As for Doctor Death himself, I give him credit for his passion to his cause. I think he is a bit too, how to say it, excited about the idea of doctors being able to assist in their patient’s suicides. I don’t think he quite realizes that for the safety of the patient as well as the doctor there should be some major rules set in place first. I don’t agree with assisted suicide, but I don’t think it should be completely illegal. I think a person has a right to their body, and in the case of painful deaths, they should be able to choose. Doctor Death may not have been the right person to voice his opinion for his cause. In fact, I think he might have damaged the reputation of assisted suicide with his abrasiveness. I don’t think we would be on a “slippery slope” if assisted suicide was legalized, because I don’t believe that there is ever a definite “slippery slope”. Assisted suicide is such a complex idea. And I don’t see it being compromised on in any near future.